DBMS > Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. RavenDB vs. SQLite vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. RavenDB vs. SQLite vs. Valentina Server

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	78.40
Rank	#15	Overall
	#10	Relational DBMS

Score	3.01
Rank	#101	Overall
	#17	Document stores

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.18
Rank	#329	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Website

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

ravendb.net

www.sqlite.org

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

ravendb.net/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2010

2000

1999

Current release

V12

5.4, July 2022

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

yes

XML support

Some form of processing data in XML format, e.g. support for XML data structures, and/or support for XPath, XQuery or XSLT.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, with always 3 replicas available

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Authorization levels configured per client per database

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

More information provided by the system vendor

We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
and for displaying vendor-provided information such as key customers, competitive advantages and market metrics.